More Fear Mongering or Setup?

(CBS) U.S. officials believe Canadian arrests over the weekend and three recent domestic incidents in the United States are evidence the U.S. will
soon be hit again by a terrorist attack. Privately, they say, they'd be surprised if it didn't come by the end of the year, reports CBS News
correspondent Jim Stewart in a CBS News exclusive.

Are they trying to set us up for the next terrorist attack? The claim is that the attack will not be as big as 9/11. In fact, they claim that it may
be so small that we won’t even recognize it for what it is. Is this the attack that will bring the arrival of martial law?

The next attack here, officials predict, will bear no resemblance to Sept. 11. The casualty toll will not be that high, the target probably not that
big. We may not even recognize it for what it is at first, they say. But it's coming — of that they seem certain.

This sounds like a dire warning. Anything can now be connected to a terrorist attack.

The death of Zarqawi comes at an interesting time. We now know that the government is planning a disater/terrorism drill on the 19 of June. This
thread and the news of Zarqawis' demise all point to a series of events that could easily catapult the world into all out war.

So I ask once again, is this report more fear mongering or is it part of a setup? I suppose only time will tell.

I think you may be missing the point of the article, darkelf. They were talking about how the group in Canada and it's alleged link to the people in
the US are not aligned with AQ or any other group. What the article is saying is that we are under threat from any number of small, non-aligned
terror groups that have internally developed the funding, intelligence and materials to stage an attack. That's why they're saying the targets may
be smaller and the damage somewhat less. Not that this doens't constitute a serious threat --- it most certainly does. Oklahoma City taught us
that.

Originally posted by jtma508
I think you may be missing the point of the article, darkelf. They were talking about how the group in Canada and it's alleged link to the people in
the US are not aligned with AQ or any other group. What the article is saying is that we are under threat from any number of small, non-aligned
terror groups that have internally developed the funding, intelligence and materials to stage an attack. That's why they're saying the targets may
be smaller and the damage somewhat less. Not that this doens't constitute a serious threat --- it most certainly does. Oklahoma City taught us
that.

I understand that. My point is that they (the govt.) can call any incident a terror attack by their own definition.

The next attack here, officials predict, will bear no resemblance to Sept. 11. The casualty toll will not be that high, the target probably not that
big. We may not even recognize it for what it is at first, they say. But it's coming — of that they seem certain.

The death of Zarqawi gives them the fuel for the fire. If the jihad in Iraq may be planning retaliatory attacks, what’s to stop some nut job over
here doing the same? Or what is to stop the government from blaming a small incidence on them as an excuse to institute martial law?

"Zarqawi's martyrdom is not going to weaken the jihad in Iraq," said Khalid Khawaja, a former Pakistani intelligence officer who aided militants
like Osama bin Laden during their fight against the Soviets in Afghanistan. "Rather, you will soon see more retaliatory attacks by his
successors."

I am not predicting that this will happen. I am only trying to connect the dots to get the full picture. I have to question everything. It’s my
nature.

BEIJING (Reuters) - The United States warned on Friday of a possible terrorist threat against its interests in China, especially in the three major
cities of Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou.

"This threat also may exist for places where Americans are known to congregate or visit, including clubs, restaurants, places of worship, schools or
outdoor recreation events," the U.S. embassy said in a notice on its Web site (www.beijing.usembassy.gov).

Now that both HTTP extensions and HTTP/1.1 are stable specifications, W3C has closed the HTTP Activity. The Activity has achieved its goals of
creating a successful standard that addresses the weaknesses of earlier HTTP versions....

Strikes me that that's not the article that everyone's takling about here...

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.